Appeal No. 1998-1668
Application No. 08/469,670
Appealed claims 26-57 stand rejected under the judicially
created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting over
claims 1-23 of U.S. Patent No. 5,500,200.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellants' arguments
for patentability. However, we are in complete agreement with
the examiner that the claimed subject matter is an obvious
variation of the invention claimed in appellants' patent.
Accordingly, we will sustain the examiner's rejection.
There is apparently no dispute that U.S. '200, like the
present claims on appeal, claims a continuous method for
producing carbon fibrils without the coproduction of a thermal
carbon overcoat comprising the steps of introducing a suitable
gaseous fibril precursor into a fluid bed reactor, reacting
the precursor in the fluid bed in the presence of finely
divided particles of a catalyst, and removing the product
fibrils from the reactor through an effluent port. It is
appellants' contention that the patented claims do not teach
or suggest introducing the fibril precursor into a lower part
of a vertical fluid bed reactor and removing the product
fibrils at an effluent port located in a lower part of the
vertical reactor.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007